Homosexuality and Teens Having Sex

[Caine Isle]

UnhealthyTruthseeker i gave my opinion and you should respect it, no my grammer isn't great but get over it.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

As soon as I hear the word "power" use in reference to sex, it makes me think that the person talking that way is a feminist. There is little or no truth that I recognize in that revolting philosophy advocated by the likes of one Gloria Stein who was not concerned with truth but concerned with power. Accordingly, it is hard to take any of that stuff seriously. I will choose cupid over a feminist any day of the week.

Considering the fact that you've literally not addressed any points at all, I think the one that can't be taken seriously here is you.

[Glorious Freedonia]

If we take sin out of the picture, there is no harm that I am aware of. Can you think of any?

So there's no tangible harm? Then, you are admitting that your morality is arbitrary and not based on any principles whatsoever. I therefore discard it as incoherent.

Do what you want. If it is arbitrary, then so what? The point is that I have the proper relationship with the divine, namely a humble one. It takes a long time to realize the nature of God. Science has taken a long time to figure out some of the mystery of the world. That is most noble reason why God gave us brains.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

UnhealthyTruthseeker i gave my opinion and you should respect it, no my grammer isn't great but get over it.

I don't have to respect your opinion at all.

[Sdaeriji]

UnhealthyTruthseeker i gave my opinion and you should respect it, no my grammer isn't great but get over it.

That makes no sense. If it's my opinion that you should be drawn and quartered, then lit on fire, should you still respect my opinion?

[Ifreann]

If we take sin out of the picture, there is no harm that I am aware of. Can you think of any?

So there's no tangible harm? Then, you are admitting that your morality is arbitrary and not based on any principles whatsoever. I therefore discard it as incoherent.

Do what you want. If it is arbitrary, then so what? The point is that I have the proper relationship with the divine, namely a humble one. It takes a long time to realize the nature of God. Science has taken a long time to figure out some of the mystery of the world. That is most noble reason why God gave us brains.

God gave us brains so we could not use them and do whatever it says in a book? Methinks not.

[Caine Isle]

UnhealthyTruthseeker i gave my opinion and you should respect it, no my grammer isn't great but get over it.

I don't have to respect your opinion at all.

Which is why you are an asshole, have no freinds and spend your life complaining about what people say on forums. make the world a better place and die

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Which is why you are an asshole, have no freinds and spend your life complaining about what people say on forums. make the world a better place and die

You're the one that should become an hero, you self-contradictory troll.

[Caine Isle]

lol troll ;D

[Hex Omega]

Successful trolls are successful. RIP this thread.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

If it is arbitrary, then so what?

"So what?" is not the proper response to arbitrariness. Lacking an underlying logic is inherently negative.

The point is that I have the proper relationship with the divine, namely a humble one. It takes a long time to realize the nature of God. Science has taken a long time to figure out some of the mystery of the world. That is most noble reason why God gave us brains.

However, it takes no time whatsoever to pretend that you know god's exact desires and plans and existence.

[Glorious Freedonia]

What question have I not answered?

You never gave a full response to my original question (in what way does homosexuality harm society), only stating that it was a "biblical crime." And no, the bible doesn't give me any more information about what harmful things it does. I checked.

If we take sin out of the picture, there is no harm that I am aware of. Can you think of any?

If we leave sin in the picture: what harm does this specific sin do to society (as opposed to merely the eternal futures of the people engaging in it)? I understood that, unless some justification for temporal punishment was offered (eg your sin of theft has deprived some guy of his car), your sins were generally between you, your priest/rabbi/imam/spiritual advisor/whatever, and God.

Do you know the justification for why this particular behavior is considered sinful?

I do not know why the sin is considered sinful. I do not even know if these rules are divinely inspired or if they are a part of the Jewish tradition but I believe that it comes from one of those possible choices (and either way I am in, obviously).

I am not sure I understand what your question is but there is a societal prohibition in either Deuteronomy or Leviticus (I think it is in Leviticus) that comes immediately after the individual prohibition. The language requires no tolerance for male homosexuality by society.

It is therefore not only a sin to have gay sex but it is also sinful for a community to tolerate it.

[Ifreann]

What question have I not answered?

You never gave a full response to my original question (in what way does homosexuality harm society), only stating that it was a "biblical crime." And no, the bible doesn't give me any more information about what harmful things it does. I checked.

If we take sin out of the picture, there is no harm that I am aware of. Can you think of any?

If we leave sin in the picture: what harm does this specific sin do to society (as opposed to merely the eternal futures of the people engaging in it)? I understood that, unless some justification for temporal punishment was offered (eg your sin of theft has deprived some guy of his car), your sins were generally between you, your priest/rabbi/imam/spiritual advisor/whatever, and God.

Do you know the justification for why this particular behavior is considered sinful?

I do not know why the sin is considered sinful. I do not even know if these rules are divinely inspired or if they are a part of the Jewish tradition but I believe that it comes from one of those possible choices (and either way I am in, obviously).

I am not sure I understand what your question is but there is a societal prohibition in either Deuteronomy or Leviticus (I think it is in Leviticus) that comes immediately after the individual prohibition. The language requires no tolerance for male homosexuality by society.

It is therefore not only a sin to have gay sex but it is also sinful for a community to tolerate it.

And you admit that you have no idea why these prohibitions exist, yet you go along with them none the less.

[Czardas]

Which is why you are an asshole, have no freinds and spend your life complaining about what people say on forums. make the world a better place and die

You're the one that should become an hero, you self-contradictory troll.

Okay, both of you just stop already.

[Reagan Clone]

I do not know why the sin is considered sinful. I do not even know if these rules are divinely inspired or if they are a part of the Jewish tradition but I believe that it comes from one of those possible choices (and either way I am in, obviously).

I am not sure I understand what your question is but there is a societal prohibition in either Deuteronomy or Leviticus (I think it is in Leviticus) that comes immediately after the individual prohibition. The language requires no tolerance for male homosexuality by society.

It is therefore not only a sin to have gay sex but it is also sinful for a community to tolerate it.

Once you've decided that you don't know (or apparently care) why something is considered "sinful", why not just extend that characteristic of answer to everything you've said?

Your problem with male homosexuality is that you think its a sin, but you don't know why your source makes it a sin, just run with that.

Why are gays sinful? Don't know. Just believe it.

And once we are convinced by that equally for everyone else, we get:

Why should blacks not be allowed to vote? Don't know. Just believe it.

Why should women be subjugated? Don't know. Just believe it.

Why should you be taken away to a camp? Don't know. Just believe it.

Now of course, you aren't saying any of those things, but they are presented with exactly the same logic and reason that you've applied to your position, so...

[Glorious Freedonia]

If it is arbitrary, then so what?

"So what?" is not the proper response to arbitrariness. Lacking an underlying logic is inherently negative.

The point is that I have the proper relationship with the divine, namely a humble one. It takes a long time to realize the nature of God. Science has taken a long time to figure out some of the mystery of the world. That is most noble reason why God gave us brains.

However, it takes no time whatsoever to pretend that you know god's exact desires and plans and existence.

There are two questions that must be answered. The first is, "Is it possible that God works in mysterious ways and we do not always fathom the truth?" The second is, "If God gave us an arbitrary rule, should we follow it or do we serve God by demonstrating that we understand the arbitrariness and defy it?"

God gave us reason and we must use the gifts that we were given or else this is blasphemous at worst and prostitution at best. To try to understand the nature of God seems all well and good. Perhaps if exercising our conscience causes us to defy God then this is only ok if he is ok with it. I do not know the answer. It seems to me that the proper relationship to the divine is humble worship and acceptance. Since he is the creator he creates the rules.

It is of course easy to understand that God works in mysterious ways. This is perhaps best illustrated by an analogy I hear a minister tell on the radio about a bird that entered a building. A man found a bird in this condition. The bird was in a panic. The man opened doors and windows but the bird was still clueless. We can be like that with gay sex. We might not be able to figure out why it is bad just like the bird could not figure out that it should calm down and exit through an open door or window. There may be a reason that we just do not realize yet.

[Glorious Freedonia]

What question have I not answered?

You never gave a full response to my original question (in what way does homosexuality harm society), only stating that it was a "biblical crime." And no, the bible doesn't give me any more information about what harmful things it does. I checked.

If we take sin out of the picture, there is no harm that I am aware of. Can you think of any?

If we leave sin in the picture: what harm does this specific sin do to society (as opposed to merely the eternal futures of the people engaging in it)? I understood that, unless some justification for temporal punishment was offered (eg your sin of theft has deprived some guy of his car), your sins were generally between you, your priest/rabbi/imam/spiritual advisor/whatever, and God.

Do you know the justification for why this particular behavior is considered sinful?

I do not know why the sin is considered sinful. I do not even know if these rules are divinely inspired or if they are a part of the Jewish tradition but I believe that it comes from one of those possible choices (and either way I am in, obviously).

I am not sure I understand what your question is but there is a societal prohibition in either Deuteronomy or Leviticus (I think it is in Leviticus) that comes immediately after the individual prohibition. The language requires no tolerance for male homosexuality by society.

It is therefore not only a sin to have gay sex but it is also sinful for a community to tolerate it.

And you admit that you have no idea why these prohibitions exist, yet you go along with them none the less.

Yes. I admit that. But I need to explain that the motivation is more important than the reasoning. It is like when Jesus (who regardless of whatever else he was or was not was still a Hebrew) said that if you want to eat meat for the glory of God, then eat meat for the glory of God. If you want to not eat meat to the glory of God, then avoid meat to the glory of God. The point is to do what you do for the glory of God. There is wisdom in that.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

There are two questions that must be answered. The first is, "Is it possible that God works in mysterious ways and we do not always fathom the truth?" The second is, "If God gave us an arbitrary rule, should we follow it or do we serve God by demonstrating that we understand the arbitrariness and defy it?"

God gave us reason and we must use the gifts that we were given or else this is blasphemous at worst and prostitution at best. To try to understand the nature of God seems all well and good. Perhaps if exercising our conscience causes us to defy God then this is only ok if he is ok with it. I do not know the answer. It seems to me that the proper relationship to the divine is humble worship and acceptance. Since he is the creator he creates the rules.

It is of course easy to understand that God works in mysterious ways. This is perhaps best illustrated by an analogy I hear a minister tell on the radio about a bird that entered a building. A man found a bird in this condition. The bird was in a panic. The man opened doors and windows but the bird was still clueless. We can be like that with gay sex. We might not be able to figure out why it is bad just like the bird could not figure out that it should calm down and exit through an open door or window. There may be a reason that we just do not realize yet.

I don't buy "We just can't ever know." arguments most of the time. They are nothing but cop-out responses.

As for "He created us. He thus makes the rules." you must be in favor of might makes right, correct? There's no way you can support such a notion and believe in objective morality.

[Reagan Clone]

What question have I not answered?

You never gave a full response to my original question (in what way does homosexuality harm society), only stating that it was a "biblical crime." And no, the bible doesn't give me any more information about what harmful things it does. I checked.

If we take sin out of the picture, there is no harm that I am aware of. Can you think of any?

If we leave sin in the picture: what harm does this specific sin do to society (as opposed to merely the eternal futures of the people engaging in it)? I understood that, unless some justification for temporal punishment was offered (eg your sin of theft has deprived some guy of his car), your sins were generally between you, your priest/rabbi/imam/spiritual advisor/whatever, and God.

Do you know the justification for why this particular behavior is considered sinful?

I do not know why the sin is considered sinful. I do not even know if these rules are divinely inspired or if they are a part of the Jewish tradition but I believe that it comes from one of those possible choices (and either way I am in, obviously).

I am not sure I understand what your question is but there is a societal prohibition in either Deuteronomy or Leviticus (I think it is in Leviticus) that comes immediately after the individual prohibition. The language requires no tolerance for male homosexuality by society.

It is therefore not only a sin to have gay sex but it is also sinful for a community to tolerate it.

And you admit that you have no idea why these prohibitions exist, yet you go along with them none the less.

Yes. I admit that. But I need to explain that the motivation is more important than the reasoning. It is like when Jesus (who regardless of whatever else he was or was not was still a Hebrew) said that if you want to eat meat for the glory of God, then eat meat for the glory of God. If you want to not eat meat to the glory of God, then avoid meat to the glory of God. The point is to do what you do for the glory of God. There is wisdom in that.

Then apply that equally.

After all, it is not what goeth into the mouth, like a big meaty wang, that defilith a man, but what comes out...so...we should swallow, I guess, is the point.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Yes. I admit that. But I need to explain that the motivation is more important than the reasoning. It is like when Jesus (who regardless of whatever else he was or was not was still a Hebrew) said that if you want to eat meat for the glory of God, then eat meat for the glory of God. If you want to not eat meat to the glory of God, then avoid meat to the glory of God. The point is to do what you do for the glory of God. There is wisdom in that.

There's no wisdom in it at all. It's just a blanket excuse to justify any action whatsoever, no matter how objectionable, as being "for the glory of god."

[Czardas]

What question have I not answered?

You never gave a full response to my original question (in what way does homosexuality harm society), only stating that it was a "biblical crime." And no, the bible doesn't give me any more information about what harmful things it does. I checked.

If we take sin out of the picture, there is no harm that I am aware of. Can you think of any?

If we leave sin in the picture: what harm does this specific sin do to society (as opposed to merely the eternal futures of the people engaging in it)? I understood that, unless some justification for temporal punishment was offered (eg your sin of theft has deprived some guy of his car), your sins were generally between you, your priest/rabbi/imam/spiritual advisor/whatever, and God.

Do you know the justification for why this particular behavior is considered sinful?

I do not know why the sin is considered sinful. I do not even know if these rules are divinely inspired or if they are a part of the Jewish tradition but I believe that it comes from one of those possible choices (and either way I am in, obviously).

I am not sure I understand what your question is but there is a societal prohibition in either Deuteronomy or Leviticus (I think it is in Leviticus) that comes immediately after the individual prohibition. The language requires no tolerance for male homosexuality by society.

No, I understand that. My question was whether it explains why the act is a sin.

Evidently, it doesn't.

Since you consider sexuality holy and divine etc, this seems like the kind of thing you should find out. Ask a rabbi or a scholar of the Law; they will likely have a better explanation than "I don't know, it just is."

If it is arbitrary, then so what?

"So what?" is not the proper response to arbitrariness. Lacking an underlying logic is inherently negative.

The point is that I have the proper relationship with the divine, namely a humble one. It takes a long time to realize the nature of God. Science has taken a long time to figure out some of the mystery of the world. That is most noble reason why God gave us brains.

However, it takes no time whatsoever to pretend that you know god's exact desires and plans and existence.

There are two questions that must be answered. The first is, "Is it possible that God works in mysterious ways and we do not always fathom the truth?" The second is, "If God gave us an arbitrary rule, should we follow it or do we serve God by demonstrating that we understand the arbitrariness and defy it?"

God gave us reason and we must use the gifts that we were given or else this is blasphemous at worst and prostitution at best. To try to understand the nature of God seems all well and good. Perhaps if exercising our conscience causes us to defy God then this is only ok if he is ok with it. I do not know the answer. It seems to me that the proper relationship to the divine is humble worship and acceptance. Since he is the creator he creates the rules.

So you don't believe there is any purpose in studying the Bible, merely in accepting its contents without questioning?

[Glorious Freedonia]

I do not know why the sin is considered sinful. I do not even know if these rules are divinely inspired or if they are a part of the Jewish tradition but I believe that it comes from one of those possible choices (and either way I am in, obviously).

I am not sure I understand what your question is but there is a societal prohibition in either Deuteronomy or Leviticus (I think it is in Leviticus) that comes immediately after the individual prohibition. The language requires no tolerance for male homosexuality by society.

It is therefore not only a sin to have gay sex but it is also sinful for a community to tolerate it.

Once you've decided that you don't know (or apparently care) why something is considered "sinful", why not just extend that characteristic of answer to everything you've said?

Your problem with male homosexuality is that you think its a sin, but you don't know why your source makes it a sin, just run with that.

Why are gays sinful? Don't know. Just believe it.

And once we are convinced by that equally for everyone else, we get:

Why should blacks not be allowed to vote? Don't know. Just believe it.

Why should women be subjugated? Don't know. Just believe it.

Why should you be taken away to a camp? Don't know. Just believe it.

Now of course, you aren't saying any of those things, but they are presented with exactly the same logic and reason that you've applied to your position, so...

The problem is that man finds himself living in two cities simultaneously. He lives in the City of God and the City of Man. This is reconciled by making sure that we can do both simultaneously. If there is a conflict between the two, we must choose our faith. My priorities are as follows: God, Country, Family, Self, Other People. It is easy to live when you have your priorities straight. If God is first then you know where you stand. Look at Abraham and Issac. Abraham did not want to kill Issac but he put God first.

After you have dealt with your divine obligations, you are free to participate in the world of man. But one must never put the world of Man first before God for that is idolatrous blasphemy.

[Reagan Clone]

I don't buy "We just can't ever know." arguments most of the time. They are nothing but cop-out responses.

As for "He created us. He thus makes the rules." you must be in favor of might makes right, correct? There's no way you can support such a notion and believe in objective morality.

Well, you're wrong. There's nothing wrong with just saying "I don't know why or how its true, but I'll live my life by it."

Its just like De Moivre's Theorem was proven in line #3, where it says "I don't know why this is true, we just need to humbly submit to it".

And when the other mathematicians suggested this might not be rigorous, de Moivre responded by saying "Well, its kind of like if a bird goes into a building..."

See?

[Reagan Clone]

I do not know why the sin is considered sinful. I do not even know if these rules are divinely inspired or if they are a part of the Jewish tradition but I believe that it comes from one of those possible choices (and either way I am in, obviously).

I am not sure I understand what your question is but there is a societal prohibition in either Deuteronomy or Leviticus (I think it is in Leviticus) that comes immediately after the individual prohibition. The language requires no tolerance for male homosexuality by society.

It is therefore not only a sin to have gay sex but it is also sinful for a community to tolerate it.

Once you've decided that you don't know (or apparently care) why something is considered "sinful", why not just extend that characteristic of answer to everything you've said?

Your problem with male homosexuality is that you think its a sin, but you don't know why your source makes it a sin, just run with that.

Why are gays sinful? Don't know. Just believe it.

And once we are convinced by that equally for everyone else, we get:

Why should blacks not be allowed to vote? Don't know. Just believe it.

Why should women be subjugated? Don't know. Just believe it.

Why should you be taken away to a camp? Don't know. Just believe it.

Now of course, you aren't saying any of those things, but they are presented with exactly the same logic and reason that you've applied to your position, so...

The problem is that man finds himself living in two cities simultaneously. He lives in the City of God and the City of Man. This is reconciled by making sure that we can do both simultaneously. If there is a conflict between the two, we must choose our faith. My priorities are as follows: God, Country, Family, Self, Other People. It is easy to live when you have your priorities straight. If God is first then you know where you stand. Look at Abraham and Issac. Abraham did not want to kill Issac but he put God first.

After you have dealt with your divine obligations, you are free to participate in the world of man. But one must never put the world of Man first before God for that is idolatrous blasphemy.

Is there any part of you that realizes that using a cliched analogy to merely restate your assumptions in no way addresses the critique illustrated in my post?

But after all, some guy probably doesn't WANT to kill his child, or discriminate against gays, or strap explosives onto himself and run into a crowd...but we must put God first.

[Glorious Freedonia]

Yes. I admit that. But I need to explain that the motivation is more important than the reasoning. It is like when Jesus (who regardless of whatever else he was or was not was still a Hebrew) said that if you want to eat meat for the glory of God, then eat meat for the glory of God. If you want to not eat meat to the glory of God, then avoid meat to the glory of God. The point is to do what you do for the glory of God. There is wisdom in that.

There's no wisdom in it at all. It's just a blanket excuse to justify any action whatsoever, no matter how objectionable, as being "for the glory of god."

That would be true if there were no sins. But sin is actually helpful to us because it defines conduct that cannot be performed to the glory of God. Sorry fellas but being greatly skilled in the arts of the joys of gaiety is not something that can be done for the glory of God.